Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?

help.mistral.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 262 posts

Re: Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?

#241

Post by F3nd0 »

KPGv2 wrote: post #236
F3nd0 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since the whole idea of ‘opt in’ is choosing to do something, the only reasonable interpretation of ‘opt in by default’ is that the default state requires you to make the choice yourself. However I try to bend my brain, sing the term ‘opt in’ for the exact opposite makes no sense whatsoever. Note that I’m not using English grammar as my argument; human language (and English especially) has plenty of exceptions and ex…

Here's the dictionary: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/opt-in > The property of having to choose *explicitly* to join or permit something; a decision having the *default option being exclusion or avoidance*; used particularly with regard to mailing lists and advertising. You're just using the term wrong. That's okay, I've used words wrong before, and it just means you've been presented an opportunity for learning a ne…

My use seems to be perfectly in line with the given dictionary definition, though? Did you perhaps mean to address a different comment?

Re: Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?

#242

Post by Noaidi »

No one will read this but AI probably. I am done with contributing to AI. I never used AI but even posting here I am contributing to it as AI is known to scrape HN.

https://alterlab.io/blog/how-to-give-your-ai-agent-access-to...

So no more data for them. No more social media, no more cloud storage, just no more.

It's been fun, but I am smarter than AI, so bye.

Re: Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?

#243

Post by F3nd0 »

PotatoPrime wrote: post #183
F3nd0 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since the whole idea of ‘opt in’ is choosing to do something, the only reasonable interpretation of ‘opt in by default’ is that the default state requires you to make the choice yourself. However I try to bend my brain, sing the term ‘opt in’ for the exact opposite makes no sense whatsoever. Note that I’m not using English grammar as my argument; human language (and English especially) has plenty of exceptions and ex…

I read it as though he was trying to say '[you are] opt[ed] in by default'. Now granted, he did not say that, and I only reached that conclusion by the rest of this conversation, but I think to have meant that and said '... was now also opt-in by default...' isn't unreasonable. Just sharing since you mentioned you couldn't see how using that term for the opposite would make sense.

Thank you. However, assuming you mean ‘an affirmative choice is made for you’ when you say ’you are opted in’, that use really takes the ‘opt’ out of the ’opt-in’. You can opt in, but you can’t have someone else ‘opt you in’ for you; that seems to go against the very core meaning of ‘opt-in’ (i.e. having to explicitly choose something yourself).

In other words, you can explicitly choose something by yourself, but if other people (in this case companies, service providers) choose something for you, it’s no longer your explicit decision made by yourself. Hence why I believe we can’t consider that ‘opting in’.

Re: Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?

#244

Post by zamadatix »

20k wrote: post #156
gitgud wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have an enterprise contract with them, the legal protections for the consumer is much higher… is what I’ve been told anyway

It isn't, in both cases you're protected by exactly the same legal system

It's also the same planet but finding a commonality somewhere in the chain is not the same thing as finding a lack of difference in the matter.

Re: Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?

#245

Post by nozzlegear »

samename wrote: post #192
nozzlegear wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also pay for duck.ai's service. They're my main "chat bot" thing, and while I had already been paying for their other services when I discovered I also had a duck.ai subscription, I choose to use them primarily because privacy is their whole brand. I only have two minor complainst: I want my conversations to sync between mobile and desktop (while being E2E), and I want a way to organize conversations into "projects…

Have you tried Lumo by Proton? It is E2EE and has projects. A bit more expensive than duck.ai but I found the model to be good enough

No, I hadn't heard of Lumo before. Thanks for the heads up!

Re: Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?

#246

Post by lukewarm707 »

solaire_oa wrote: post #167
20k wrote: post #140

You have to be rather naive if you don't think these companies don't simply train on your prompts with or without your consent. They literally scrape everything - legal or not - and claim its fair use to train on, including straight piracy The idea that they'll steal from everyone except you is just wishful thinking

Pinky-promises, embarrassing. I'd point to tinfoil.sh. I'm not a shill for tinfoil, I haven't even used it or looked past its homepage really, but if we are able to legitimately secure privacy, then training data questions are moot (and the market for training data would probably shift/expose).

agreed. the pricing is a nightmare. either $20 for codex and up to 00 millions of tokens or $0.50 cache in per million in tee.

Re: Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?

#247

Post by lukewarm707 »

forabi wrote: post #222
samename wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you tried Lumo by Proton? It is E2EE and has projects. A bit more expensive than duck.ai but I found the model to be good enough

How could a cloud LLM be E2EE?

it isn't.

Re: Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?

#248

Post by dsign »

munksbeer wrote: post #207

I can understand companies not wanting to leak sensitive data or information, so not wanting their inputs used for training. But the individual level moral perspective confuses me. You object to your own input being used for training "for free", but you're ok to use models which already slurped the data of millions of other people "for free"? I don't get it. Obviously this is going to be a controversial take on here…

There's something to this argument. I for one use an API proxy (Kagi Assistant) when I'm submitting anything remotely sensitive to an LLM. But for coding in my hobby project, I have marked "use my conversations for training" in the Claude app. I do it in the off chance that one day we will use stupid amounts of compute for personalized medicine and to fight cancer; code for scientific and technical computing is really complicated and only a tiny fraction of humans can produce it.

Re: Can I opt out of my input or output data being used for training?

#249

Post by deadbabe »

flakeoil wrote: post #205
deadbabe wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t care about what they do, I only care about what they say, that way, when compliance requires us to use LLMs that don’t train on inputs, I can point to that policy and continue on using the LLM. If they are secretly scraping input prompts, that no longer becomes my problem. Someday, a massive lawsuit comes down, and everyone gets to play the victim. You’re naive for thinking we don’t know how this really works…

What they say is not the same as what they wrote in the ToS you didn't read. If they stole your stuff and used in to train their model, what does it help if there is a lawsuit some years later which you most likely have no benefit from?

Because I can get on with my life and do my job. Let the legal departments worry about that.
Post reply on HN